[2001] International Fisheries Bulletin No. 6

Review of recent regional developments

This page contains three short articles on recent developments occurring in three regions. First, the latest failure to reach agreement on measures for blue whiting in the Northeast Atlantic is discussed; secondly, the latest round of negotiations for the establishment of a regional fishery organization in the Southwest Indian Ocean are reported on; and finally, various events occurring in the Southwest Atlantic squid fishery, in Argentina and the Falkland Islands, are reviewed.

Northeast Atlantic: Blue whiting talks end in failure
Southwest Indian Ocean: SWIOFC negotiations
Southwest Atlantic: squid fishery
      

Northeast Atlantic: Blue whiting talks end in failure

Negotiations in Reykjavik, on 15 and 16 February, for conservation measures for blue whiting in the Northeast Atlantic broke down with the two main parties, Norway and the European Union (EU) blaming each other for the failure. The parties involved are the five coastal States, the EU, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland and Norway, and the Russian Federation, which has been associated in the negotiations as a ‘specially invited participant’ in view of their blue whiting fisheries activities in international waters. The negotiations also have to be viewed in the wider framework of the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), which establishes compatible conservation measures for the portion of the stock which is found outside the waters under national fisheries jurisdiction. Whilst a TAC has not yet been set (although ICES has recommended a TAC of 628,000 tonnes for 2001, well below recent catch levels), the main issue at stake is how to share out any TAC amongst the parties concerned. The failure to agree stems from the excessive opening bids requested by the parties last year. These are: EU 66% , Faroe Islands 37%, Greenland 2%, Iceland 22% and Norway 37%, together with a possible NEAFC portion of about 5%. In total, these claims add up to about 170% of a possible TAC. At this latest round in the negotiations (the parties have met four times before), the European Commission suggested that the EU should be allowed 58% of the quota, the Faroe Islands 21%, Norway 12%, with the remaining nine percent divided between other parties. The Commission considered this proposal to be fair and equitable, arguing that it was based on historical catch limits. Norway and Iceland, however, pointed out that it would have left them with less than half of their original catch demand, while the European Union's catch remained almost unchanged. Neither country would comment on the proposal and declined to continue with the negotiations.

Blue whiting is not a commercially high value species, but has been subject to increasing interest in recent years because of dwindling opportunities in other fisheries and because of its use in the burgeoning surimi production industry. (Surimi is a Japanese term and describes food with high potential for a long frozen shelf life and for the production of a variety of texturized products such as fake crab, scallops and lobster). Since 1994, NEAFC has set TACs for blue whiting, but this has not been allocated amongst parties. Since the late 1990s, catches of blue whiting have increased considerably and have exceeded NEAFC TACs by considerable margins. In 2000, for example, the total catch was approximately 1.4 million tons, more than twice the TAC set by NEAFC. Scientific advice for 2001 suggests that the total allowable catch should be set at 628,000 tonnes. 

The latest breakdown has left the different sides blaming the others for the failure to reach an agreement. In language rare for an EU institution, the European Commission described the current catch situation of blue whiting as "anarchic" and accused Iceland and, in particular, Norway of being “irresponsible” and not showing any interest in establishing an agreement for the fishery. In Norway, the fishing industry is clearly blaming the EU. The Norwegian association for owners of the deep-sea fishing fleet, Fiskebåtredernes Forbund, has suggested that there should be no further negotiations under the premises laid down by the EU. Nevertheless, the parties will meet again later this year.
     

Southwest Indian Ocean: SWIOFC negotiations

Representatives from 12 countries (Australia, Comoros, France, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, New Zealand, Seychelles, South Africa and Tanzania) and the European Community met in La Reunion from 6 to 9 February for the Intergovernmental Consultation on the establishment of a South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC). The Consultation is the latest stage in the negotiations and come after two earlier technical consultations. The process for the establishment of SWIOFC began in June 1999 when FAO, in Council Resolution 1/116, authorized the Director-General to convene ad hoc meetings to facilitate the establishment of a regional fishery body in the South West Indian Ocean to replace the former South West Indian Ocean Committee of the Indian Ocean Fishery Commission (IOFC) which was abolished in February 1999 as part of the overall arrangements for the termination of the parent body. The former members of the Committee were Comoros, France, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Somalia and Tanzania. 

The main objectives of the proposed Commission will be to promote the sustainable development, conservation, rational management and optimum utilization of fisheries resources in the region. Given that tuna management, however, is covered by other bodies in the region, principally the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), it is proposed that the Commission will concentrate on fisheries targeted at non-tuna species. There was, in fact, considerable discussion at the Consultation on the objectives of the proposed Commission, with distant-water fishing States concerned about ensuring effective conservation and sustainability of deep-sea stocks and the coastal States concerned about conserving and managing the fishery resources in their waters and in receiving financial assistance to sustainably develop their fisheries. Indeed, the divergent interests of the high seas States and the developing coastal States was an issue which arose at several points in the Consultation, and a number of delegates expressed concern about this development. It was therefore decided that these divergent issues would be considered by a subcommittee to be held just before the next Consultation. 

The draft text, as it currently stands, contains a long list of functions which the proposed Commission will have. Most of these follow what are now fairly standard formulations, for example, reviewing the state of fishery resources and fisheries; evaluating the impact of fishing, other human activities and environmental factors on the fishery resources; developing measures to minimize bycatch; and promoting, coordinating and undertaking research. Some of the listed functions, however, such as the development of measures to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, reflect current issues of concern. The draft text also refers to the precautionary approach and provides that the proposed Commission shall take into account the “best international practices” regarding the application of the precautionary approach, and refers directly to the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

The special position of developing States is addressed comprehensively in the draft text, which covers the recognition by all parties of the special requirements and positions of developing States in relation to fishery management and provides for the cooperation of parties, including the possibility of financial assistance to be directed towards improved conservation and management of fishery resources, stock assessment and scientific research and monitoring, control and enforcement.

Membership of the Commission will be open to members or associate members of FAO that are either coastal States in the region or States whose vessels engage in fishing in the region. Membership is also open to regional economic integration organizations of which any State which would qualify for membership has transferred competence over matters covered by the agreement. This is of relevance in the South West Indian Ocean, where the European Community (EC) has a substantial tuna fleet operating. Non-members of FAO which are coastal States or have vessels which fish in the region may also become members, subject to the approval of two-thirds of existing members. This is the standard formulation for fisheries organizations established under Article XIV of the FAO Constitution. At this stage it is not clear, however, whether the body will remain under FAO auspices or whether it will be independent. This issue was discussed at the Consultation but the results were inconclusive. A number of delegations expressed strong support for remaining within FAO, while a number of others argued that the matter should remain open for the time being, pending further consideration of the matter. 

There does not appear yet to be complete agreement on the decision-making procedures to be applied in any new Commission, although there does appear to be a preference for consensus wherever possible, with qualified voting as a last resort. 
  

Southwest Atlantic: Argentina and Falkland Islands

In February, the Argentinean Government expressed its concern about what it described as a "virtual floating city" of fishing vessels, targeting squid adjacent to the Argentinean EEZ. According to Argentina, these vessels, which number up to 300 and come mainly from Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Spain, gather nightly just outside its EEZ in an area that covers 75 square miles to fish for squid. The vessels use powerful spotlights to attract squid from Argentinean waters into international waters, where they are caught. Although these vessels, which remain outside the EEZ, are not technically violating international law, the Argentinean authorities complain that these activities are damaging the national harvest and ecological balance of the waters and say that while they are able to regulate national annual harvests – to 60 per cent of the species’ population - they are unable to control fishing outside their maritime limits. Fishermen say they will incur heavy financial loses, but believe there is no threat of extinction.

Argentinean authorities have indicated that if fishing activities beyond its EEZ continue to undermine resources within its zone then it may take additional measures beyond 200 miles. In some quarters, this has been reported as Argentina suggesting that it might claim a 350-mile EEZ. It is not clear whether this was formally suggested by the Argentinean Government, although it certainly does not appear to be its official position. More recently, at the meeting of FAO's Committee on Fisheries, the Argentinean delegation denied that Argentina were considering any extension of its fisheries jurisdiction. In any case, such action would certainly contravene international law and it is doubtful whether the international community would currently accept such a claim. However, it does appear that Argentina may be considering some other sort of extra-jurisdictional action, such as is taken by other Latin American countries, namely Chile, Ecuador and Peru. None of these States claim fisheries jurisdiction beyond 200 miles, but do claim the right, such as under the Mar Presencial in Chile, to undertake additional surveillance measures and other actions against vessels fishing in areas adjacent to their jurisdiction. It should be pointed out, however, that the validity of these claims in international law is also, at best, uncertain. 

The suggestion of any sort of unilateral measures has not been welcomed by the Falkland Islands which have recommended a cooperative approach. In a press release issued by the Falkland Councilor with responsibility for fisheries, the Falkland authorities recognized the concerns of Argentina but stated that overfishing of squid in the international waters of the Southwest Atlantic was not a new problem. According to the Councilor, the machinery was in place to negotiate a multilateral solution and all that was required was action and a bit of goodwill to start moving towards solving the problem. 

A bilateral fisheries commission (the South Atlantic Fisheries Commission, or SAFC) was established by Argentina and the United Kingdom in 1990 to assess the state of relevant fish stocks, including squid, and to make recommendations to both Argentine and UK Governments on the conservation of such resources. In 1999, a Joint Statement issued by Britain and Argentina committed the SAFC to consider multilateral arrangements relating to high seas fisheries. Preliminary discussions have taken place, involving the UK, Argentina and the European Community, but so far very little progress has been made.